Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1887-09-15
THE RAILROAD MUDDLE.
Speeches by varions MEMBERSHIP De.
cisiOn Arrived At.

CONCORD, N. H.. Sept. IA.
In the House, Wednesday forenoon, after
the conclusion of routine business the debate
on the railroad question was resumed Mr..
Young of Rochester spoke in opposition 90
the Hazen bill. He said he addressed men,
bers from sense of duty, and in conformity
to the wishes of his constituents. The bust.
ness men of his town were opposed t. the
bill. Lsboring men of his town and of the
State for whom he spoke were opposed to
what wss once kn ,wn as the Hazen bill, but
is now re-orgsnzed as the Boston & Maine
scheme, to secure control of the railroads of
this Stste. He believed in competition.
Consolidation has worked nothing but harm
in his town and section. Parallel lines
should never consolidate, and competing
roads should never be brought together. As
laboring man, he was also opposed to con-
ent move, an attempt to introduce into State
policy Gould and Vanderbilt
He quoted Horace Greeley, James A Gar
field, jeremiah Black and others, on dangers
to the public from mOnopoles and continued
that he was lover of New Hampshire, and
he hoped this State would be freed from mo-
nopolistic power welded by railroads in some
sections of this country. Let US indefinitely
postpone the Hszen bill and resist the at
tempts of the Boston & Maine to create a
great monopoly within our borders.
Mr.. O'Connor. Manchester, followed on
the same side. He said that the Boston &
Maine, foreign corporation, comes here
and asks for the passage of the Hazen bill.
Among the questions to be considered in the
determination of the controversy are, what
was the purpose of the Colby bill
Did the Boston & Lowell lease the Northern
& Montreal road in good faith, and did the
Concord have fair opportunity to lease
those lines as a member of the Legislature
of 1888, he voted for the Colby bill, OR
understanding, that it was designed to al
low the union of lines in the Merrimac Val.
ley into one system, and to resist the attempt
of the Boston & Lowell. Had the purpose of
that bill been to permit foreign corporations
to come here and seize our railr Dads, he never
would have voted for it.
The purpose of the Colby bill was to keep
the Lowell out of the state, instead of to let
it in. The report of the majority
of the railroad committee in 1883
stated that the purpose of the bill was to
permit union of State railroads. The Bos-
ton & Lowell did not come here in 1884
and lease the Northern & Montreal in good
faith. The stat had served notice on them
to that effect, and yet, disregarding that
fact, that road came here. The Lowell took
the Nasua & Lowell, and operated it under
a lease which has never been ratified, and is
now operating i; in violation of the laws of
this state In 1888 the legislature said to
the Lowell "We don't want you in this state. y
At the annual meeting of the Northern rail-
road stockholders in June, 1884, after the
lease Of the line had been agreed upon by
directors notice, served on Mr. Dow and
others, they were acting in violation of the
law, and that lease would be contested. This
notice they disregarded, and violated our law
by taking the line and operating it until the
decision of the supreme court severed it.